Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
PhD Student, Department of Higher Education Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2
Professor, Department of Educational Management, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3
Associate Professor, Department of Educational Management, Saveh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Saveh, Iran.
4
Associate Professor, Department of Higher Education Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Research Sciences Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to present a marketing model of higher education centers.
Materials and Methods: Doing mixed research (qualitative-quantitative). In order to conduct this research, in addition to the documentary study, the content analysis technique with MAXQDA12 software was used to identify the indicators related to the marketing of higher education centers of the identified dimensions. The statistical population in this study was all experts in the field of educational mediation and strategic marketing, which was done after 11 theoretical saturation interviews. Validity was obtained through 4 experts and by two colleagues and reliability of the Copa formula (0.633).
Findings: As a result of 2 dimensions, 44 indicators were identified. Educational dimension with 5 components (teachers, educational content, training time, teaching method and method of teaching) and non-educational dimension with 7 components (welfare facilities, social, cultural and artistic services, economic services, sports services, educational staff, services International education and educational space) were identified as the main dimensions and components of marketing in higher education centers. To present the researcher-made questionnaire model, it was distributed among 100 faculty members and managers of knowledge-based companies and finally, using the structural equation technique, all indicators were approved and the educational dimension with a coefficient of 0.848 has the most impact and importance in the model. Non-educational with a coefficient of 0.690 has less impact. The validation of the model was measured by 5 dimensions (philosophy and purpose with an average of 3.512, theoretical foundations with an average of 3.658, executive principles with an average of 3.452, evaluation system with an average of 3.342 and executive mechanism with an average of 3.739), all of which were above average. .
Conclusion: The results showed that the educational dimension with a coefficient of 0.848 and the non-educational dimension with a coefficient of 0.69 have the most impact and importance in the model, respectively.
Keywords
